Can you sue your employer?

[bethsha211]

I have a friend that has a hearing with WC for an injury that the IC has decided she doesn't need.She had a impairment rating done and the doctor who did it said that she was MMI even though the EMG and NCV showed carpal tunnel.Poor thing is in a lot of pain and is working because she has no choice at least until the hearing.Question is, can she get a civil suit against her employer and the IC in the state of Texas or is the employer covered against this because of having insurance? She doesn't have a computer so I am trying to get some info for her.
Thanks.

[dipweed23]

encourage your friend to seek the advice of councel. The worst they could say is that she has no case.
Some states allow for a tort to be brought aganst the company as soon as the insurance company says that it is not covered under work comp. I would think that if your friend works with their hands in a repetitive motion environment, that carpel tunnel syndrome should be considered an occupational disease.

i cant stress enough, now is the time to seek councel

[bethsha211]

dipweed23 Wrote:encourage your friend to seek the advice of councel. The worst they could say is that she has no case.
Some states allow for a tort to be brought aganst the company as soon as the insurance company says that it is not covered under work comp. I would think that if your friend works with their hands in a repetitive motion environment, that carpel tunnel syndrome should be considered an occupational disease.

i cant stress enough, now is the time to seek councel

Thanks! I will let her know.
Have a great day!!

[1171]

Under texas law workers comp insurance protects an employer from civil suit.

[Dallas307]

correct 1171-Texas WC is sole remedy- the reason for the coverage is so the IW can not sue the employer

[bethsha211]

Dallas307 Wrote:correct 1171-Texas WC is sole remedy- the reason for the coverage is so the IW can not sue the employer

She thought that she could sue them both. I didn't think you could and that was why they had coverage.
Thanks for the answers

[Dallas307]

She needs to handle all of her disputes through the DWC process.

[NewDriver]

Absolutely in all 50 states WC is the "exclusive remedy" for injuries resulting out of and in the course of employment. Now here is a twist, Texas is the only state that WC is NOT compulsory. Employers are not requred to carry WC. It is available and IMHO they are stupid not to carry it but they are not required to as are the other 49.

My first question is does her employer actuallly have WC insurance? If so then yes the only thing she is entitled to is what remedies are available under WC law.

Now if they DON'T carry WC coverage it changes the whole picture. Then she has the option of persuing a Tort action in civil court. There are pros and cons to both. With WC coverage the injury has to be covered reagardless of fault, aside of willful misconduct by the employee. It may take some time to make them cover it if the claim is denied/controverted. This time is very short in comparrision to the civil Tort actions as this can take years to resolve. WC pays nothing for pain and suffering where Tort action the field is wide open. Another pro with WC is that once the claim is approved at the hearing most states allow for penalties and interest to be added for the delay due to the employer or their EC dragging it out.

Some statues even allow for large penalties if it is proven that the claim was obviously legitimate and should have been covered from the get. When the employer denies or instructs the IC to deny coverage and this is done with the intent to defraud the employee of coverage they can be held liable for thier willful and melicious actions. I have not checked for sure in TX but the part on fraud is a part of most all WC statues nationwide. The thing that many people fail to realize is that is applicable to both the employee and employer.

I take it the WC hearing is to contest that they are saying she dosen't need treatment for the injury? Is that correct? The way your qustion is worded isn't totally clear.

CTS is a boogger to deal with. Often times very painful and quite frankly scary/freaky when you can't feel your hands/fingers. When I had my first all out onslought with CTS I had a NP at my docs office try to tell me it shouldn't hurt. That CTS does not cause pain! HA! I ask her if she were to stand in a bucket of water, stuff her hands into a light socket and then have someone throw the switch if she thought it would hurt. That is exactly how CTS feels at times. Ironically after I had the CTS release surgery that pain I "wasn't" having went away after a few days of healing from the surgery. Kind of makes me believe that CTS CAN and DOES cause terrible pain. Another thing your friend must be careful of is to not continue working in the same enviornment that casued the CTS, nor should she contiue doing anything outside of work that aggrvates the CTS. Doing things that put strain on the hands wrist will only make her CTS symptoms worse and make it harder to correct the damage.

CTS can be an even bigger pain in the butt to get covered under WC in the absence of a taumatic injury to the hands or wrists. Although it may be hard to get it coverd under WC it dosen't make it impossible. Under "Cumalative Trauma" guidelines is where WC usually has to cover it, IF the doctor indicates that the casue of the CTS is work related. And IF there was not specific injury to the hands or wrists.

So having said all that is your friend represented by competent legal council that practices law in the WC arena as a specialty? If not now is a very good time for her to seek such. They don't charge up front for fees, some charge a small amout as the case evolves to cover the costs to assert the claim, (reports from docs, depositions, etc.). Most hower work on full contingency and are not paid until such time as the benefits are received or the claim is settled. They are regulated by law as to how much they can charge and this is usually expressed as a percentage of the value of the claim. At the very minimum she could go in for a consultation and get answers to some basic questions which is usually offered free of charge.

Good Luck to her.

[Bad Boy Bad Boy]

Many States are and soon will be combating the issues of CTS being Work related, but will all depend on the type of work the person is and was doing over the years. Havard was the first to reach on this issue, and since then, many IC's are using this information to their benefits.

http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/nat.../62979.htm

Please read in full.

[NewDriver]

Okay BB I went and read the report or at least the exerpt that was available. I also read the entire blog of enteries in reference to the report.

In one part of the report the claim is made that CTS is not a RSI. Priviously the report says that improper use of computer and work place enviornment can contribute to RSI. Left me kind of confused.

Kind of leaves one to wonder who paid for he studies and at what price. I suppose if enough money is envolved even prestigious entities such as Harvard can be bought. Just a theory certainly not with facts in evidence.

At the end of the day I can only swear for a fact the CTS has some very nasty and painful symptoms. At times bad enough to put you on the verge of just knowing you are going to loose your mind. I also know to have one that is supposed to be a medical professional, such as the NP at my docs office, to proclaim that CTS DOES NOT cause pain hasn't got a clue. That was my point in the earlier post.